Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1887-05-13
The Supreme Court.

The death of Justice WooDs, of the
United States Supreme Court, would
furnish good reason why the State of
Virginia should again have a case de-
cided in that tribunal involving the
question whether the eleventh amend
ment to the Federal Constitution is a
mere jingle of words, or a real bull
wark erected by the fathers OF the re-
public for the protection of the several
States against encroachments upon
their rights by the United States.
Justices BRADLEY, MILLER, and
GRAY. and Chief-Justice WAITE held
in the Virginia coupon cases that
suing o States officers was suing the
State, and consequently that the cou-
pom suits against the officers of this
State ought to have been decided in
favor of the Commonwealth. Five
Justices-namely, HARLAN, WOODS,
MATTHEWS, BLATCHFoRD. and FIELD
rendered in the same cases the decision
which has been the occasion of so
much trouble to the people of this
Commonwealth.
The occasion is also one for mOraliz-
ing little. Think of one Justice de-
Gliding the cases which have made Viz
ginia the victim of so many unspeaka-
BILE wrongs; of one Justice making it
possible for Judge BOND to drag this
honored old Commonwealth before his
court, andinfiict untold indignities upon
her; of one man out of sixty millions of
people having conferred upon him by
a usurpation of authority the power
so to administer the laws of this free
country-for it is an administering of
the laws that has caused so much
trouble-as to have a State threatened
day after day with the terrors of the
Federal courts, and her laws declared |
by the agents of the bondholders to be
unworthy of respect.
The Supreme Court of the United |
States is a partisan tribunal. Every
member Of it was appointed by a Re
publican President. FIELD and MILLER
were appointed by LINCOLN BRADLEY,
and WAITE by GRANT; HARLAN. WOODS,
and MATTHEWS by HAYES GRAY by
GARFIELD, and BLATcHFoRD by
ARTHUR. We are not sure that we
have credited HAYES and GARFIELD
severally with the right appointments
though they made all those we have
credited to them but there is no doubt
that every Justice of the Supreme
Court was appointed by q Repubh-
can President. 1t necessarily fol-
lows that all questions which
come before that body involy-
ing a fundamental difference be-
tween the two great parties are decided
in favor of the Republican party S view
OF those questions. The most impor-
tant difference between the two parties
was involved in all the coupon cases
namely, the extent OF the powers of
the Federal Government, and conse-
quently the extent of the powers of
the Supreme Court of the United
States. The result was inevitable.
The decisions were mere parti-
san MISUNDERSTANDING more. We
do not charge that the court
decided any of the cases otherwise
than as the Justices honestly held that
they ought to be decided; but that
holding the views they did as to
the relative rights or powers of the
Federal and State governments, they
could net have rendered any other than
a partisan decision. 1t follows of course
that if all the Justices had been Demo
Gratis, the decisions in the Virginia
coupon cases would have been in favor
OF the State. With even one genuine
Democrat on the bench of the Supreme
Court, we should expect reversal of
its decision as to the proper construc-
ton Of the eleventh amendment.